Path: csiph.com!feeder.erje.net!2.us.feeder.erje.net!feeder.usenetexpress.com!feeder-in1.iad1.usenetexpress.com!border1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.earthlink.com!news.earthlink.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2017 12:56:41 -0500
Message-ID: <599092D8.532C@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2017 10:56:40 -0700
From: The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com>
Reply-To: starmaker@ix.netcom.com
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.04Gold (WinNT; U)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Subject: Re: Why is there more than one explanation for the Twin Paradox
References: <b201e7c4-e103-4b46-94c2-10c12b3cc717@googlegroups.com> <yaudnWDf2PPiQB7EnZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <1cb6775d-d2c1-498b-9576-088e3e7ed2be@googlegroups.com> <jr-dnWNeO8tB5xnEnZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <4790542.Sb9uPGUboI@PointedEars.de> <e7WdnXbopds-6hXEnZ2dnUU7_81i4p2d@giganews.com> <c7ce3586-3916-4ad9-9ffa-0501ec11d95c@googlegroups.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Antivirus: Avast (VPS 170813-0, 08/13/2017), Outbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
Lines: 52
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: 108.219.229.47
X-Trace: sv3-FF4622SotwJ2HAflN0wHQ8MKKt/t1LEu28OGdqilcKUTiYTxstJE8smOE/rESfEI4whMeQHx/rPKCQy!se6oRljrYl1LfEvVqpp18tZZDCumPRu64YMZ7zraSM7b9LBlB9v4KgS/zxkpam3vcEsBJ9NqYvfK!gwnsq0juEfE=
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 3309
Xref: csiph.com sci.physics.relativity:428538

Nicolaas Vroom wrote:
> 
> On Monday, 7 August 2017 16:22:34 UTC+2, tjrob137  wrote:
> > On 8/4/17 8/4/17 - 6:22 PM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
> > > Tom Roberts wrote:
> > >> [...]
> > > *time dilation* (a *proper* scientific term that, in contrast to other
> > > scientific terms, for unknown reasons you ridiculously liked to put in
> > > double-quotes, as if it were not).
> >
> > I put "time dilation" and "length contraction" in quotes because they are
> > VERY POOR names for the phenomena they refer to. That is, for "time dilation"
> > time does NOT actually dilate, and for "length contraction" lengths do NOT
> > actually contract -- those phrases refer to the clock or object in question,
> > which in all cases is UNAFFECTED.
> > Both "time dilation" and "length contraction" are really geometrical
> > projections that affect how observers moving relative to an object
> > will MEASURE the object, and the phrases do not capture this fact at all
> > -- at face value they imply that the object itself is somehow changed,
> > but it isn't.
> 
> Is the concept geometrical projections equivalent with something mathematical?
> 
> Does this also indicate that both "time dilation" and "length contraction"
> are not something physical? In the sense that when you heat an iron rod its
> length becomes longer?
> 
> But what about a moving clock i.e. when two clocks are moved along
> different path and when they meet the number of ticks is different?
> 
> Nicolaas Vroom
> 


But the question is...When did the number of ticks become different? At what time did the number of ticks become different?


1) right away

2) a little while later

3) a week later

4) sometimes

5) all the time

6) the first tick



I gotta get into my car and go varrrooooooooooooommmm.